Skip to main content

Assessment of Psychosocial Contributions to Disability

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 740 Accesses

Abstract

Disability has traditionally been defined in biomedical terms and closely associated with objective physical impairment. More recent conceptualizations though, hold that a comprehensive evaluation of disability requires not only the assessment of objective physical impairment, but also an assessment of the psychosocial context in which the disability occurs. Some psychosocial risk factors, such as socioeconomic status, are objective in nature. In contrast, other psychosocial risk factors, such as depression, are determined by the report of subjective states. To assess these subjective states, standardized psychological tests can play a valuable role. The defining characteristics of standardized psychological tests are discussed, as are their uses. Commonly used psychological tests are reviewed. Practical questions are also addressed, such as when to administer psychological tests, what psychosocial risk factors need to be assessed, what tests to use, methods of quantifying the level of psychosocial risk, and the detection of faking.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (2008). Occupational medicine practice guidelines (2nd Revised ed.). Beverly Farms, MA: OEM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. (2008b). Chronic pain treatment guidelines. In K. Hegmann (Ed.), Occupational medicine practice guidelines (2nd ed.). Beverly Farms, MA: OEM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education, Joint Committee on Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (U.S.). (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual on mental disorders, fourth edition, text revision (DSM-IV). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • American Psychiatric Association. Task Force on DSM-IV (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders : DSM-IV-TR (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbisi, P. A., & Butcher, J. N. (2004). Psychometric perspectives on detection of malingering of pain: Use of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 20(6), 383–391.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Aronoff, G. M., & Livengood, J. M. (2003). Pain: Psychiatric aspects of impairment and disability. Current Pain and Headache Reports, 7(2), 105–115.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Aronoff, G. M., Mandel, S., Genovese, E., et al. (2007). Evaluating malingering in contested injury or illness. Pain Practice, 7(2), 178–204.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Artiola i Fortuny, L., & Mullaney, H. A. (1997). Neuropsychology with Spanish speakers: Language use and proficiency issues for test development. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 19(4), 615–622.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barsky, A. J., & Borus, J. F. (1995). Somatization and medicalization in the era of managed care. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 274(24), 1931–1934.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Tellegen, A. (2008). MMPI-2-RF™ manual. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, T. N., Jr. (1993). Repeat lumbar spine surgery. Factors influencing outcome. Spine, 18(15), 2196–2200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchini, K. J., Curtis, K. L., & Greve, K. W. (2006). Compensation and malingering in traumatic brain injury: A dose-response relationship? The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 20(4), 831–847.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Binder, L. M., & Rohling, M. L. (1996). Money matters: A meta-analytic review of the effects of financial incentives on recovery after closed-head injury. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 153(1), 7–10.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Block, A. R., Gatchel, R. J., Deardorff, W. W., & Guyer, R. D. (2003). The psychology of spine surgery. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Block, A. R., Ohnmeiss, D. D., Guyer, R. D., Rashbaum, R. F., & Hochschuler, S. H. (2001). The use of presurgical psychological screening to predict the outcome of spine surgery. The Spine Journal, 1(4), 274–282.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boersma, K., & Linton, S. J. (2005). Screening to identify patients at risk: Profiles of psychological risk factors for early intervention. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 21(1), 38–43. discussion 69–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bornstein, B. H., Whisenhunt, B. L., Nemeth, R. J., & Dunaway, D. L. (2002). Pretrial publicity and civil cases: A two-way street? Law and Human Behavior, 26(1), 3–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bruns, D., & Disorbio, J. M. (2003). Battery for health improvement 2 manual. Minneapolis: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruns, D., & Disorbio, J. M. (2005). Chronic pain and biopsychosocial disorders: The BHI 2 approach to classification and assessment. Practical Pain Management, 5(7), 52–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruns, D., & Disorbio, J. M. (2009). Assessment of biopsychosocial risk factors for medical treatment: A collaborative approach. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, 16(2), 127–147.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burchiel, K. J., Anderson, V. C., Brown, F. D., et al. (1996). Prospective, multicenter study of spinal cord stimulation for relief of chronic back and extremity pain. Spine, 21(23), 2786–2794.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Burton, A. K., Tillotson, K. M., Main, C. J., & Hollis, S. (1995). Psychosocial predictors of outcome in acute and subchronic low back trouble. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 20(6), 722–728.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. N., Arbisi, P. A., Atlis, M. M., & McNulty, J. L. (2003). The construct validity of the Lees-Haley Fake Bad Scale. Does this scale measure somatic malingering and feigned emotional distress? Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 18(5), 473–485.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. N., Hamilton, C. K., Rouse, S. V., & Cumella, E. J. (2006). The deconstruction of the Hy Scale of MMPI-2: Failure of RC3 in measuring somatic symptom expression. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87(2), 186–192.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, R. J., & Johnson, W. G. (2008). Satisfaction with low back pain care. The Spine Journal, 8(3), 510–521.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, R. J., Johnson, W. G., & Gray, B. P. (2007). Timing makes a difference: Early nurse case management intervention and low back pain. Professional Case Management, 12(6), 316–327. quiz 328-319.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • California Division of Workers’ Compensation (2009). Chronic pain medical treatment guidelines. Accessed July 20, 2009, from http://www.dir.ca.gov/dwc/DWCPropRegs/MTUS_Regulations/MTUS_ChronicPainMedicalTreatmentGuidelines.pdf http://www.dir.ca.gov/dwc/DWCPropRegs/MTUS_Regulations/MTUS_ChronicPainMedicalTreatmentGuidelines.pdf.

  • Campbell, L. C., Clauw, D. J., & Keefe, F. J. (2003). Persistent pain and depression: A biopsychosocial perspective. Biological Psychiatry, 54(3), 399–409.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carragee, E. J., Alamin, T. F., Miller, J. L., & Carragee, J. M. (2005). Discographic, MRI and psychosocial determinants of low back pain disability and remission: A prospective study in subjects with benign persistent back pain. The Spine Journal, 5(1), 24–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carragee, E. J., Barcohana, B., Alamin, T., & van den Haak, E. (2004). Prospective controlled study of the development of lower back pain in previously asymptomatic subjects undergoing experimental discography. Spine, 29(10), 1112–1117.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, T. T., Lam, T. H., & Hedley, A. J. (2005). Correlation among physical impairments, pain, disability, and patient satisfaction in patients with chronic neck pain. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 86(3), 534–540.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chou, R., Baisden, J., Carragee, E. J., Resnick, D. K., Shaffer, W. O., & Loeser, J. D. (2009). Surgery for low back pain: A review of the evidence for an American pain society clinical practice guideline. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 34(10), 1094–1109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colorado Division of Workers’ Compensation. Chronic Pain Task Force (2007). Rule 17, Exhibit 9: Chronic pain disorder medical treatment guidelines: Colorado Department of Labor and Employment: Division of Worker Compensation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colorado Division of Workers’ Compensation. (2009). Rule 17: Medical Treatment Guidelines. Accessed June 9, 2009, from http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/CDLE-WorkComp/CDLE/1248095316866 http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/CDLE-WorkComp/CDLE/1248095316866.

  • DeBerard, M. S., Masters, K. S., Colledge, A. L., & Holmes, E. B. (2003). Presurgical biopsychosocial variables predict medical and compensation costs of lumbar fusion in Utah workers’ compensation patients. The Spine Journal, 3(6), 420–429.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • den Boer, J. J., Oostendorp, R. A., Beems, T., Munneke, M., & Evers, A. W. (2006). Continued disability and pain after lumbar disc surgery: The role of cognitive-behavioral factors. Pain, 123(1–2), 45–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • den Boer, J. J., Oostendorp, R. A., Beems, T., Munneke, M., Oerlemans, M., & Evers, A. W. (2006). A systematic review of bio-psychosocial risk factors for an unfavourable outcome after lumbar disc surgery. European Spine Journal, 15(5), 527–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deyo, R. A., Mirza, S. K., Heagerty, P. J., Turner, J. A., & Martin, B. I. (2005). A prospective cohort study of surgical treatment for back pain with degenerated discs; study protocol. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 6(1), 24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Disorbio, J. M., & Bruns, D. (2002). Brief battery for health improvement 2 manual. Minneapolis: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Disorbio, J. M., Bruns, D., & Barolat, G. (2006). Assessment and treatment of chronic pain: A physician’s guide to a biopsychosocial approach. Practical Pain Management, 6(2), 11–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epker, J., & Block, A. R. (2001). Presurgical psychological screening in back pain patients: A review. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 17(3), 200–205.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fairbank, J. C., & Pynsent, P. B. (2000). The oswestry disability index. Spine, 25(22), 2940–2952. discussion 2952.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fejer, R., & Hartvigsen, J. (2008). Neck pain and disability due to neck pain: What is the relation? European Spine Journal, 17(1), 80–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fishbain, D. A., Cutler, R., Rosomoff, H. L., & Rosomoff, R. S. (1997). Chronic pain-associated depression: Antecedent or consequence of chronic pain? A review. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 13(2), 116–137.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fishbain, D. A., Cutler, R., Rosomoff, H. L., & Rosomoff, R. S. (1999). Chronic pain disability exaggeration/malingering and submaximal effort research. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 15(4), 244–274.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, C. V. (1986). The somatizing disorders. Psychosomatics, 27(5), 327–331. 335–327.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Frederick, R. I., & Bowden, S. C. (2009). Evaluating constructs represented by symptom validity tests in forensic neuropsychological assessment of traumatic brain injury. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 24(2), 105–122.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frederick, R. I., & Crosby, R. D. (2000). Development and validation of the validity indicator profile. Law and Human Behavior, 24(1), 59–82.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Frederick, R. I., Crosby, R. D., & Wynkoop, T. F. (2000). Performance curve classification of invalid responding on the validity indicator profile. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 15(4), 281–300.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Frymoyer, J. W., & Cats-Baril, W. L. (1991). An overview of the incidences and costs of low back pain. The Orthopedic Clinics of North America, 22(2), 263–271.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Furr, R. M., & Bacharach, V. R. (2008). Psychometrics: An introduction. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, R. M. (2004). Biopsychosocial pain medicine and mind-brain-body science. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America, 15(4), 855–882. vii.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gatchel, R. J. (2001). A biopsychosocial overview of pretreatment screening of patients with pain. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 17(3), 192–199.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gatchel, R. J. (2004). Comorbidity of chronic pain and mental health disorders: The biopsychosocial perspective. The American Psychologist, 59(8), 795–805.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gatchel, R. J., & Mayer, T. G. (2008). Psychological evaluation of the spine patient. The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 16(2), 107–112.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gatchel, R. J., Mayer, T. G., & Eddington, A. (2006). MMPI disability profile: The least known, most useful screen for psychopathology in chronic occupational spinal disorders. Spine, 31(25), 2973–2978.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gatchel, R. J., Polatin, P. B., & Mayer, T. G. (1995). The dominant role of psychosocial risk factors in the development of chronic low back pain disability. Spine, 20(24), 2702–2709.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gervais, R. O., Rohling, M. L., Green, P., & Ford, W. (2004). A comparison of WMT, CARB, and TOMM failure rates in non-head injury disability claimants. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 19(4), 475–487.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Giordano, N., & Lofland, K. (2005a). A literature review of psychological predictors of spinal cord stimulator outcomes. The Journal of Pain, 6(3 Supplement), S67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giordano, N., & Lofland, K. (2005). A literature review of psychological predictors of spinal cord stimulator outcomes. American Pain Society 24th Annual Scientific Meeting, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glassman, S. D., Minkow, R. E., Dimar, J. R., Puno, R. M., Raque, G. H., & Johnson, J. R. (1998). Effect of prior lumbar discectomy on outcome of lumbar fusion: A prospective analysis using the SF-36 measure. Journal of Spinal Disorders, 11(5), 383–388.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Grace, V. M. (2000). Pitfalls of the medical paradigm in chronic pelvic pain. Baillière’s Best Practice & Research. Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 14(3), 525–539.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Greene Jackson, D., Hamilton, P., Hutchinson, S., & Huber, J. (2009). The effect of patients’ race on provider treatment choices in coronary care: A literature review for model development. Policy, Politics & Nursing Practice, 10(1), 40–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenough, C. G., Taylor, L. J., & Fraser, R. D. (1994). Anterior lumbar fusion. A comparison of noncompensation patients with compensation patients. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 300, 30–37.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Greiffenstein, M. F., Baker, W. J., & Johnson-Greene, D. (2002). Actual versus self-reported scholastic achievement of litigating postconcussion and severe closed head injury claimants. Psychological Assessment, 14(2), 202–208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Groth-Marnat, G., & Fletcher, A. (2000). Influence of neuroticism, catastrophizing, pain duration, and receipt of compensation on short-term response to nerve block treatment for chronic back pain. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 23(4), 339–350.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gureje, O. (2007). Psychiatric aspects of pain. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 20(1), 42–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gureje, O. (2008). Comorbidity of pain and anxiety disorders. Current Psychiatry Reports, 10(4), 318–322.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hagg, O., Fritzell, P., Ekselius, L., & Nordwall, A. (2003). Predictors of outcome in fusion surgery for chronic low back pain. A report from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study. European Spine Journal, 12(1), 22–33.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R. C. (2007). Detection of malingered PTSD: An overview of clinical, psychometric, and physiological assessment: Where do we stand? Journal of Forensic Sciences, 52(3), 717–725.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heckler, D. R., Gatchel, R. J., Lou, L., Whitworth, T., Bernstein, D., & Stowell, A. W. (2007). Presurgical Behavioral Medicine Evaluation (PBME) for implantable devices for pain management: A 1-year prospective study. Pain Practice, 7(2), 110–122.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hyams, J. S. (2004). Irritable bowel syndrome, functional dyspepsia, and functional abdominal pain syndrome. Adolescent Medicine Clinics, 15(1), 1–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Iverson, G. L. (2007). Identifying exaggeration and malingering. Pain Practice, 7(2), 94–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., Brant-Zawadzki, M. N., Obuchowski, N., Modic, M. T., Malkasian, D., & Ross, J. S. (1994). Magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine in people without back pain. The New England Journal of Medicine, 331(2), 69–73.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jette, A. M., & Badley, E. (2000). Conceptual issues in the measurement of work disability. In N. Mathiowetz & G. S. Wunderlich (Eds.), Survey measurement of work disability: Summary of a workshop (pp. 4–27). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kessler, R. C., Chiu, W. T., Demler, O., Merikangas, K. R., & Walters, E. E. (2005). Prevalence, severity, and comorbidity of 12-month DSM-IV disorders in the National comorbidity survey replication. Archives of General Psychiatry, 62(6), 617–627.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Klekamp, J., McCarty, E., & Spengler, D. M. (1998). Results of elective lumbar discectomy for patients involved in the workers’ compensation system. Journal of Spinal Disorders, 11(4), 277–282.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Koch H. (1986). The management of chronic pain in office-based ambulatory care: National ambulatory medical care survey. In NDPN (Ed.), Advance data from vital and health statistics, pp. 86–1250. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koho, P., Aho, S., Watson, P., & Hurri, H. (2001). Assessment of chronic pain behaviour: Reliability of the method and its relationship with perceived disability, physical impairment and function. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 33(3), 128–132.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • LaCaille, R. A., DeBerard, M. S., Masters, K. S., Colledge, A. L., & Bacon, W. (2005). Presurgical biopsychosocial factors predict multidimensional patient: Outcomes of interbody cage lumbar fusion. The Spine Journal, 5(1), 71–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, W. J. (2004). Determination of effort level, exaggeration, and malingering in neurocognitive assessment. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 19(3), 277–283.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lysgaard, A. P., Fonager, K., & Nielsen, C. V. (2005). Effect of financial compensation on vocational rehabilitation. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 37(6), 388–391.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mailis-Gagnon, A., Nicholson, K., Blumberger, D., & Zurowski, M. (2008). Characteristics and period prevalence of self-induced disorder in patients referred to a pain clinic with the diagnosis of complex regional pain syndrome. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 24(2), 176–185.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mannion, A. F., & Elfering, A. (2006). Predictors of surgical outcome and their assessment. European Spine Journal, 15(Suppl 1), S93–108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mendelson, G., & Mendelson, D. (2004). Malingering pain in the medicolegal context. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 20(6), 423–432.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, G. J., Finn, S. E., Eyde, L. D., et al. (2001). Psychological testing and psychological assessment. A review of evidence and issues. American Psychologist, 56(2), 128–165.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mitrushina, M. N., Boone, K. B., & D’Elia, L. (1999). Handbook of normative data for neuropsychological assessment. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mittenberg, W., DiGiulio, D. V., Perrin, S., & Bass, A. E. (1992). Symptoms following mild head injury: Expectation as aetiology. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 55(3), 200–204.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mittenberg, W., Patton, C., Canyock, E. M., & Condit, D. C. (2002). Base rates of malingering and symptom exaggeration. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 24(8), 1094–1102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, C. J., & Lopez, A. D. (1997). Alternative projections of mortality and disability by cause 1990-2020: Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet, 349(9064), 1498–1504.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, N. W., Sweet, J. J., Berry, D. T., Bryant, F. B., & Granacher, R. P. (2007). Response validity in forensic neuropsychology: Exploratory factor analytic evidence of distinct cognitive and psychological constructs. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 13(3), 440–449.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, N. W., Sweet, J. J., & Demakis, G. J. (2006). Meta-analysis of the MMPI-2 fake bad scale: Utility in forensic practice. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 20(1), 39–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ong, K. S., & Keng, S. B. (2003). The biological, social, and psychological relationship between depression and chronic pain. Cranio, 21(4), 286–294.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ormel, J., VonKorff, M., Ustun, T. B., Pini, S., Korten, A., & Oldehinkel, T. (1994). Common mental disorders and disability across cultures. Results from the WHO Collaborative Study on Psychological Problems in General Health Care. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 272(22), 1741–1748.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pickering, T. G. (2001). Mental stress as a causal factor in the development of hypertension and cardiovascular disease. Current Hypertension Reports, 3(3), 249–254.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pledger, C. (2003). Discourse on disability and rehabilitation issues. Opportunities for psychology. The American psychologist, 58(4), 279–284.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Polatin, P. B., Kinney, R. K., Gatchel, R. J., Lillo, E., & Mayer, T. G. (1993). Psychiatric illness and chronic low-back pain. The mind and the spine–which goes first? Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 18(1), 66–71.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, T. J., Mayer, T. G., Gatchel, R. J., & McGeary, D. D. (2004). Unremitting health-care-utilization outcomes of tertiary rehabilitation of patients with chronic musculoskeletal disorders. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume, 86-A(1), 62–69.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reagan, R. (2009). Remarks on signing the intermediate-range nuclear forces treaty, 1987. Accessed September 13, 2009, From http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1987/120887c.htm.

  • Rohling, M. L., Binder, L. M., & Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J. (1995). Money matters: A meta-analytic review of the association between financial compensation and the experience and treatment of chronic pain. Health Psychology, 14(6), 537–547.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rondinelli, R. D., Genovese, E., Brigham, C. R., & American Medical Association. (2008). Guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment (6th ed.). Chicago, IL: American Medical Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy-Byrne, P. P., Davidson, K. W., Kessler, R. C., et al. (2008). Anxiety disorders and comorbid medical illness. General Hospital Psychiatry, 30(3), 208–225.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scarry, E. (1985). The body in pain: The making and unmaking of the world. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schofferman, J., Anderson, D., Hines, R., Smith, G., & White, A. (1992). Childhood psychological trauma correlates with unsuccessful lumbar spine surgery. Spine, 17(6 Suppl), S138–144.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Spengler, D. M., Bigos, S. J., Martin, N. A., et al. (1986). Back injuries in industry: A retrospective study. I. Overview and cost analysis. Spine, 11(3), 241–245.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Spitzer, W., Leblanc, F., & Dupuis, M. (1987). Scientific approach to the assessment and management of activity-related spinal disorders. A monograph for clinicians. Report of the Quebec Task Force on Spinal Disorders. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 12(7 Suppl), S1–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, M. J., Thorn, B., Haythornthwaite, J. A., et al. (2001). Theoretical perspectives on the relation between catastrophizing and pain. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 17(1), 52–64.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, V. M., Deyo, R. A., Ciol, M., et al. (2000). Patient-oriented outcomes from low back surgery: A community-based study. Spine, 25(19), 2445–2452.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Terplan, M., Smith, E. J., & Temkin, S. M. (2009). Race in ovarian cancer treatment and survival: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Cancer Causes & Control, 20(7), 1139–1150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, M. L., & Youngjohn, J. R. (2009). Let’s not get hysterical: Comparing the MMPI-2 validity, clinical, and RC scales in TBI litigants tested for effort. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 23(6), 1067–1084.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tompa, E., de Oliveira, C., Dolinschi, R., & Irvin, E. (2008). A systematic review of disability management interventions with economic evaluations. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 18(1), 16–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Turk, D. C., & Melzack, R. (1992). Trends and future directions in human pain assessment. In D. C. Turk & R. Melzack (Eds.), Handbook of pain assessment (pp. 473–479). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turk, D. C., & Okifuji, A. (2002). Psychological factors in chronic pain: Evolution and revolution. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70(3), 678–690.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, S. M., DeMers, S. T., Fox, H. R., & Reed, G. (2001). APA’s guidelines for test user qualifications: An executive summary. The American Psychologist, 56, 1099–1113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (2009). Long range plan: 1999–2003. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisbord, S. D., Fried, L. F., Arnold, R. M., et al. (2004). Development of a symptom assessment instrument for chronic hemodialysis patients: The dialysis symptom index. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 27(3), 226–240.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wise, M. G., & Ford, C. V. (1999). Factitious disorders. Primary Care, 26(2), 315–326.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Work Loss Data Institute. (2008). Official disability guidelines. Encinitas, CA: Work Loss Data Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Work Loss Data Institute. (2009). Official disability guidelines. Encinitas, CA: Work Loss Data Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization. (2008). The global burden of disease: 2004 update. Geneva: World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ylinen, J., Takala, E. P., Kautiainen, H., et al. (2004). Association of neck pain, disability and neck pain during maximal effort with neck muscle strength and range of movement in women with chronic non-specific neck pain. European Journal of Pain, 8(5), 473–478.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Bruns .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix: Psychometric Assessment Tools

Appendix: Psychometric Assessment Tools

The tests listed below are for informational purposes only, and this is not an exhaustive list. The final decision about which tests to use must be left to the evaluator. Within each section, tests are listed in alphabetical order.

Assessment Task

Test

Notesa

Description

Brief Assessments of Emotion

These tests are useful when the assessment of a patient’s emotional status is desired.

BDI II

S J B G

Beck Depression Inventory II: Well-researched measure of depression, widely used clinically and in research. A brief measure that assesses a broad range of cognitive, affective, and physical depressive symptoms. 21 items, 1 scale, no validity measures. 5 min, hand scoring, computerized scoring and report

BSI 18

S J B G N

Brief Symptom Inventory 18: Brief measure of depression, anxiety, and somatization. Community and cancer patient norms. 18 items, 3 scales, no validity measures, computerized scoring and report, and hand scoring. 2–3 min

CES-D

J G

Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale: Brief measure of depression that has been widely used in research. Assesses depression without reliance on physical symptoms, reducing the risk of false positive findings. No norms. 20 items, 1 scale, no validity measures, 3 min, hand scoring

HDI

J G

Hamilton Depression Inventory: Brief measure of depression, widely used in research. Assesses a broad range of cognitive, affective, and physical depressive symptoms. Uses community norms. 23 items, 1 scale, fifth grade reading level, no validity measures, 5 min. A variation of this is the Hamilton Rating Scale, which is a 17 or 21 item measure filled out by the professional

STAI

S J B G N

State-Trait Anxiety Inventory: Well-researched measure of both anxious states and anxious tendencies. A brief measure that assesses a broad range of cognitive, affective, and physical anxiety symptoms. Community norms. 40 items, 2 scales, no validity measures, 8–10 min

Zung

J G

Zung Depression Scale: Brief measure of depression that has been widely used in research. A brief measure that assesses a broad range of cognitive, affective, and physical depressive symptoms. Uses cutoff scores, not norms. 20 items, 1 scale, no validity measures, 5 min, hand scoring

Brief Assessment of Pain and Functioning

These tests are useful when the assessment of a patient’s ability to function is desired.

BPI-SF

S J G

Brief Pain Inventory Short Form: Assesses pain, pain variation, and pain distribution through drawing. Also assesses degree to which pain interferes with functioning. Used in pain research, no norms. 20 items, multiple measures, no validity measures, 4–6 min

Oswestry

J G

Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire: Commonly used measure of functioning in research studies is known to be sensitive to assess change. Original version has been shown to be an effective research outcome measure, multiple modified versions, and no norms. 20 Items, 1 scale, no validity measures, 4–5 min

PDQ

J G

Pain Disability Questionnaire: Brief tool that appears to be a sensitive measure of disability associated with pain. 15 items, 1 scale, no norms, no validity measures, 3–4 min

Roland and Morris

J G

Roland and Morris Disability Questionnaire: Commonly used measure of functioning in research studies is known to be able to assess change in functioning. Original version is a frequently used research outcome measure.

  

24 items, 1 scale, no norms, no validity measures, 4–5 min

  

Translated into Arabic, Chinese, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Flemish, French, German, Greek, Hindi, Hungarian, Iranian, Italian, Japanese, Kannada, Korean, Marathi, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Spanish, Swedish, Tamil, Telugu, Thai, Tunisian, Turkish, and Urdu, 3–4 min

SF 36 – V2

S J G N

Short Form 36 Questionnaire Version 2: Overall assessments of physical and mental health, Function scale is the strongest and it assesses subjective reports of impairment. Has scoring software. Original SF 36 is less well standardized. SF 36-V2 has an improved administration format, norms, and standardized scores. 36 items, 8 scales, no validity measures, 6–8 min

  

Translated into English, Spanish, German, French, Chinese, Japanese, and for persons from the following countries: Armenia, Bangladesh, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Singapore, Slovak Republic, Tanzania, Turkey, Wales (UK), and Vietnam

MPQ-SF

J B G

McGill Pain Questionnaire Short Form: Assesses sensory, affective, and evaluative dimensions through the use of verbal descriptors of pain experience as opposed to pure pain intensity, no norms. 15 items, 2 scales, no norms, no validity measures, 3–5 min

  

Translated into Amharic (Ethiopian), Arabic, Chinese, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, Flemish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Japanese, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese, Slovak, Spanish, and Swedish.

NRS

J G

Pain Numerical Rating Scale: Ubiquitous pain rating scale is recommended by JCAHO. Extremely easy to use, usually administered verbally. Unstandardized test, with unknown number of variations. No agreement on scaling (e.g., 0–10 vs. 1–100), location (e.g., rating whole body vs. one body part) or time (e.g., right now vs. typical). No norms. <1 min

VAS

J G

Pain Visual Analog Scale: Sensitive measure of pain used extensively in research. Unstandardized test, with unknown number of variations. No agreement on graphic format of test (e.g., length of line; does the line have numbers on it), location (e.g., rating whole body vs. one body part) or time (e.g., right now vs. typical). No norms. <1 min

Intermediate Length Assessments of Pain and Disability

Intermediate Length Assessments of Pain and Disability

 

BBHI 2

S J B G N

Brief Battery for Health Improvement 2: Assesses depression, anxiety, somatization, pain and function. Also has validity measures for minimizing, exaggerating, and random responding. Pain measures include pain intensity, distribution, and tolerability. Normed on both community sample and a rehabilitation sample. Computer scored. Has Spanish version. 63 items, 6 scales, 15 critical items, 1 validity measure, fifth grade reading level, 810 min

 

BPI

S J G

Brief Pain Inventory-Long Form: Assesses pain, pain variation, and pain distribution through drawing. Also assesses degree to which pain interferes with functioning. Includes demographic and medication short answer questions. 15–25 min

 

BSI

S J B G N

Brief Symptom Inventory: Brief assessment of a broad range of psychopathology, including somatization, depression, anxiety, hostility obsessive-compulsiveness, paranoid ideation, and psychoticism. 53 items, 12 scales, no validity measures, computerized scoring and report, 7–8 min

 

P3

S J B G N

Pain Patient Profile: Measure of depression, anxiety and somatization with chronic pain patient and community norm groups. Validity measure checks for random or bizarre responding. Has Spanish version. 44 items, 3 scales, one validity measure, computerized scoring and report, 12–15 min

Comprehensive Assessment of Psychopathology

These tests are useful for the comprehensive assessment of psychopathology and were designed primarily for psychiatric patients.

MCMI III

S J B G N

Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III: Scales keyed to the DSM IV. Also has scales for DSM IV diagnoses of affective and psychotic disorders, and for each form of personality disorder. Base rate scoring attempts to adjust test findings to approximate the actual base rates of psychological disorders in the psychiatric population. Has Spanish version. 175 items, 25 scales, three validity measures, critical items, computerized scoring and report, eighth grade reading level, 25–30 min

MMPI-2

S J B G N

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2: Most researched psychological test, with well-established strengths and weaknesses. Over 100 scales and indices to assess a wide range of psychological conditions. Extensive validity assessment is valuable to assess conscious or unconscious exaggeration of reports. Has Spanish version. 567 items, 100+ scales and indices, critical items, computerized scoring and report, hand scoring, sixth grade reading level, 70–90 min

MMPI-2-RF

S J B G N

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory 2 – Revised Form: New version of MMPI 2 that has undergone radical revision to correct perceived MMPI 2 deficiencies. Extensive validity assessment is valuable to assess conscious or unconscious exaggeration of reports. May be stronger at psychiatric assessment, but some studies found it to be less capable when assessing somatoform disorders. (Butcher et al, 2006; Thomas & Youngjohn, 2009) 338 items, 50 scales including 8 validity scales, critical items, fifth grade reading level 45–50 min

PAI

S J B G N

Personality Assessment Inventory: A comprehensive personality test that is significantly shorter than the MMPI 2. Assesses a broad cross-section of affective, characterological, and psychotic conditions. Multiple validity measures. 340 items, 22 scales, including 4 validity scales, critical items, fourth grade reading level, 50–60 min

Comprehensive Assessment of Medical Patients

These are psychological tests designed specifically for the comprehensive assessment of medical patients.

BHI 2

S J B G N

Battery for Health Improvement 2: Assesses broad range of psychological symptoms, characterological risks, social conflicts, coping, and physical symptoms, such as pain and disability complaints. Pain measures include pain intensity, pain distribution, pain intolerance, and dysfunctional pain cognitions. Normed on both community sample and a rehabilitation sample, plus has eight other reference groups, including chronic pain, head injury, and fake bad. Has three validity measures for minimizing, exaggerating and random responding. Has Spanish version. 217 items, 18 scales, including 3 validity measures, 30 content areas, 25 critical items, computerized scoring and report. Sixth grade reading level, 30–35 min

MBMD

S J B G N

Millon Behavioral Medicine Diagnostic: Assesses broad range of psychiatric and problematic behavioral comorbidities that may affect health management and compliance. Offers analysis of health habits, psychiatric indicators, coping styles, and stress moderators. Three validity scales were developed to detect exaggerating or minimizing of symptoms. Two patient norm groups, bariatric and chronic illness (heart disease, diabetes, HIV, neurological and others). Has Spanish version. 165 Items, 38 scales, 3 validity measures, computerized scoring, sixth grade reading level, 20–30 min

Assessment of malingering

These tests are used solely to detect malingering.

CARB

S J B G N

Computerized Assessment of Response Bias: Used to assess whether an individual is falsifying symptoms of memory impairment. No norms

Hare

S J B G N

Hare Psychopathy Checklist – Revised: The assessment can be used to help assess the degree to which an individual exhibits severe antisocial traits, in the form of a prototypical violent psychopath. May be useful if assessing patients who are making threats

SIMS

S J B G N

Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology: Used for both malingered psychopathology and neuropsychological symptoms

TOMM

S J B G N

Test of Memory Malingering: Used to assess whether an individual is falsifying symptoms of memory impairment. No norms

VIP

S J B G N

Validity Indicator Profile: Employs independent verbal and nonverbal subtests to assess the validity of the patient’s reports. Computer scored. No norms

WMT

S J B G N

Word Memory Test: Used to assess whether an individual is falsifying symptoms of verbal memory impairment. No norms

Assessment of Cognitive Ability

These tests are measures of intelligence, memory, and cognitive processing ability.

GAMA

S J B G N

Global Assessment of Mental Ability: Culture-free measure of general intellectual ability. Based on the scores on four subtest scales: Matching, Analogies, Sequences, and Construction. Community norms. 25 min timed test

RBANS

S J B G N

Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status: Measures neuropsychological status and cognitive decline in individuals who have experienced stroke, head injury, dementia, or neurological injury or disease. Community norms. Less than 30 min

WASI

S J B G N

Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence: An abbreviated measurement of adult intelligence in short and very short forms. 15 min for 2 subtests IQ. 30 min for 4 subtest IQ

WAIS-IV

S J B G N

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale – IV: Common measure of adult intelligence assesses cognitive strengths and weaknesses. WAIS-IV and WMS-IV are the only conormed ability-memory instruments. 6090 min

WMS-IV

S J B G N

Wechsler Memory Scale – IV: Measures visual and auditory memory, immediate versus delayed memory, and free recall versus cued recall as well as recognition. Normed on older adolescents and adults. 3035 min

WRAT-4

S J B G N

Wide Range Achievement Test – 4: Achievement test assesses basic academic skills of reading, spelling, and math, with norms to age 94. The test has been validated against multiple other cognitive psychological tests. 3545 min

  1. aNotes: S Standardized test materials; N Norms; J Peer reviewed journal publications; B Reviewed by Buros Institute; G Noted in Treatment Guidelines

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bruns, D., Warren, P.A. (2010). Assessment of Psychosocial Contributions to Disability. In: Warren, P. (eds) Behavioral Health Disability. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09814-2_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09814-2_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-09813-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-09814-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics